| ID | 151759 |
| Title Proper | Limiting civilian casualties as part of a winning strategy |
| Other Title Information | The Case of Courageous Restraint |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Shapiro, Jacob N ; Felter, Joseph H |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Military commanders in wartime have moral obligations to abide by international norms and humanitarian laws governing their treatment of noncombatants. How much risk to their own forces they must take to limit harm to civilians in the course of military operations, however, is unclear. The principle of proportionality in the law of armed conflict all but necessitates that they make a utilitarian calculation: potential harm to civilians must always be balanced against military value when considering actions that could hurt innocents. In asymmetric conflicts, such as most counterinsurgencies, information flows, collaboration, and ultimately the support of the local population can be key to achieving strategic objectives. Thus, limiting casualties to noncombatants and other actions that alienate the population in these types of conflicts is a key part of a winning strategy. The concept of “courageous restraint” was created to express this principle to NATO and U.S. forces fighting in Afghanistan. |
| `In' analytical Note | Daedalus Vol. 146, No.1; Winter 2017: p.44-58 |
| Journal Source | Daedalus Vol: 146 No 1 |
| Key Words | International Affairs ; Asymmetric conflicts ; Winning Strategy ; Limiting Civilian Casualties ; Courageous Restraint |